Wednesday, April 18, 2007

TASERS: GUN ALTERNATIVE * SAVAGE WINS PULITZER PRIZE

"Love one another."


GUN CONTROL: A LOGICAL ALTERNATIVE

Imagine this: every kid and teacher in that school has a gun. Someone is out in the hallway waving a gun around in the air. Everyone rushes out from classrooms to the hallway, waving their guns. WHO IS THE ORIGINAL GUNMAN? If everyone has a gun, who's the bad guy?

To the NRA and opponents of gun control: what's wrong with Tasers instead of guns? If you really are in fear and need to protect yourself, then have a taser handy.  This way it's not permanent.

Americans should have to pass eye tests, firearms classes, and metamphetamine tests, blood tests, even psychological testing (and see if they're on medications for depression or using psychotropic drugs) and be licensed BEFORE they can buy a gun.

It probably would not hurt at all to also have every applicant interviewed by someone trained to spot personality disorders, such as the kind that were so obvious to anyone who knew the mass murderer to be at Virginia Tech. The faculty there had already reported him to local police as a possible lunatic. And yet he was allowed to just walk into a gun store, where other murder weapons had been purchased, and walk out with a gun. There is something very broken about a system that failed to stop this.


For God's sake and for our children's sake, there have only been 24 justified shootings in America - versus THOUSANDS of "accidental" and rampage shootings, as a result of our lax gun laws.

In every other country where they have strict gun control, gun deaths are down.

Every day they try to fill us with fear. "The terrorists are coming over here to get us," they say. And why WOULDN'T the terrorists want to come to Virginia, for example? Why they've got some of the most lax gun laws anywhere, where even a deranged non-citizen can freely buy a high-powered assault weapon. And its not just people from overseas, criminals from all over the eastern seaboard come to Virginia in particular to buy their guns, so they can go commit crimes in other states.

The blood had not even dried on the classroom floors of Virginia Tech before the NRA launched its own offensive, in the media and in email blasts, to argue that what we really need to do is turn all our teachers into pistol packing sheriffs, and our colleges into something out of the wild west. There are only two categories of people who oppose any kind of gun regulation, lobbyists for the gun manufactures themselves, and people with personal Rambo fantasies. And the latter are possibly the LAST people who should be armed with deadly force.

The fact is that for every private citizen with the skill and JUDGEMENT to effectively intervene against someone else shooting a gun, there are many more Rambos in their own mind who would end up getting even more people killed including themselves. For every gun in a home used for successful defense against an attacker, there are many, many more used in suicides, or killing by accident, or end up stolen. Those are the statistics and they don't lie. You remember Marvin Gaye, don't you? He was killed in a family argument by his own father with a gun he bought for his father's protection.

It has never been enough to be a law-abiding citizen to be armed with a lethal weapon. With gun rights come gun responsibilities. You must be trained to use a weapon responsibly. And nobody should be able to purchase such a weapon unless they can first demonstrate this, any more than someone should be allowed to drive a car without at least first passing a driving test, together with an eye exam and a written test. They passed a law in the last Congress that said you were required to attend a special class before you could declare bankruptcy. Why not also to own a gun?

Having more guns in this country in the hands of people who can't handle them doesn't make us more safe. It makes us all LESS safe. Many of the guns already in the hands of criminals were originally sold legally (though perhaps under the most feeble of laws), and the more our society is awash with guns, the more guns criminals will get, to steal if they have to. The more guns the NRA can sell us, the more they will tell us we need to buy to "protect" ourselves from the ones already sold. What a deadly, murderous racket. Read more and take action at: http://www.peaceteam.net/gun_regulation.php TELL CONGRESS WE NEED STRONGER FEDERAL GUN REGULATIONS

No laymen, except the VERY INSECURE weaklings, need a gun that can kill people. Tasers stun the criminal and stop him in his tracks. Then you can take him to court and find out why he's doing what he's doing.

WE need to disarm all the criminals. In this day and age, with the stress of our society, the traffic, the job insecurity, the machines we're plugged into, the fear-mongering, the pharmaceutical drugs people are popping -- NOW MORE THAN EVER I DO NOT WANT NERVOUS PEOPLE TO HAVE GUNS IN THEIR HANDS.

The ENLIGHTENED, HARMONIOUS, long view is to work together to heal the ills of our society, tone down the desperation and the attraction to violence, and help us understand each other's tragedy. Truly damaged people should not be able to buy guns.

This kid was a ticking time bomb; his English teacher knew it. Why didn't someone put out an alert via his Driver's license, warning gun shop owners not to sell this kid GUNS!

People should prove why they need a gun; hunting licenses aside, they should be tested thoroughly before owning a weapon that can kill a human being.



2007 NATIONAL REPORTING

For a distinguished example of reporting on national affairs Awarded to Charlie Savage of The Boston Globe for his revelations that President Bush often used "signing statements" to assert his controversial right to bypass provisions of new laws.

The most heinous instance of a law Bush usurped was the Geneva Convention's ban on torture of human beings. Bush secretly signed his "right to torture" thereby breaking the Geneva Convention.

Bush could bypass new torture ban: Waiver right is reserved
By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | January 4, 2006

WASHINGTON -- When President Bush last week signed the bill outlawing the torture of detainees, he quietly reserved the right to bypass the law under his powers as commander in chief...

David Golove, a New York University law professor who specializes in executive power issues, said that the signing statement means that Bush believes he can still authorize harsh interrogation tactics when he sees fit. 'The signing statement is saying 'I will only comply with this law when I want to, and if something arises in the war on terrorism where I think it's important to torture or engage in cruel, inhuman, and degrading conduct, I have the authority to do so and nothing in this law is going to stop me,' " he said. ''They don't want to come out and say it directly because it doesn't sound very nice, but it's unmistakable to anyone who has been following what's going on."
www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/ articles/2006/01/04/bush_could_bypass_new_torture_ban/

Also nominated as finalists in this category were: Maurice Possley and Steve Mills of the Chicago Tribune for their investigation of a 1989 execution in Texas that strongly suggests an innocent man was killed by lethal injection, and Les Zaitz, Jeff Kosseff and Bryan Denson of The Oregonian, Portland, for their disclosure of mismanagement and other abuses in federally-subsidized programs for disabled workers, stirring congressional action.

Other items of interest coming up:

On our show this week we are having Mike Weinstein, author of "WITH GOD ON OUR SIDE: One Man's War Against an Evangelical Coup in America's Military"

Check out internationally renowned architect William McDonough and his vision of the future:
"BUILDINGS LIKE TREES, CITIES LIKE FORESTS" http://www.mcdonough.com/writings/buildings_like_trees.htm

Analysis of the Left Behind Books and their anti-Christian message

369 comments:

  1. I am a gun owner. I used to blast bunnies, pheasants, squirrels, etc. for cooking and eating.

    Nobody can argue that they'll go hunting with most handguns, and certainly not with something like a AK-47. There wouldn't be enough rabbit left behind from such weaponry to eat.

    I have no problem with a "hunting test" for weaponry. If you can't hunt with it, why have it?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Tax bullets...$15,000 per ought to do the trick.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Catching up....


    Texasshole said...
    The Imus Lynch Party
    By Pat Buchanan

    Saturday, April 14, 2007

    WASHINGTON

    In the end, it was not about Imus. It was about us.


    Hey! A Conservative who "gets it"! Hatred has no place in this nation anymore!

    Awright!

    8:52 AM


    Whiny Widdle Baby Twucker said...
    "In fact, your buttbuddy, TallTexan, was the first to allude to it, the day it happened!"
    -Carl the LIAR

    Actually Carl, Imus made his remarks on the 4th of April.



    Right, and Texasshole made note of it April 5th.

    So you were lying, I mean, saying????

    8:54 AM


    Texasshole said...
    Lydia, it's not that I'm unsympathetic to genuine stalking victims (and I believe you when you say you got death threats, etc). But the minute Carl is called on his BS, he claims he's a stalking victim. It never ends with him.


    Do you deny that you looked up and posted my personal information on this blog, Texasshole, yes or no?

    Just like Ann Coulter posted Lydia's home address?

    BY DEFINITION, that is cyberstalking and YOU are a criminal...

    8:56 AM


    Widdle Whiny Baby Twucker said...
    You know TT, attributing a racist comment to another person falsely is libel isn't it? Defamation at the very least.



    Yes, but you're sub-human, so....

    BIG SHMILE, you Nazi, BIG SHMILE!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Kicking troll ass....just another service provided by yours truly.

    Maybe Tom DeLay and I can go into business, after I forget to close the canister in his truck....

    ReplyDelete
  5. In regards to what was said on the radio and the news yesterday relating to the Virginia Tech massacre --

    I can't believe the tragedy that happened. It's absolutely horrible and I feel so sad for the victims and their families and friends. They will remain in my prayers.

    I 100% disagree with the media's idea of the boy being a terrorist. Did he have mental problems? Obviously, yes. Did he have links to terrorism – only in his own personal way in which what he did was in deed terrorizing but I seriously doubt he had any link to the Taliban.

    Do I believe video games with violent content are responsible for his actions? No way.
    I believe video games with violent content or not are pure entertainment just like films and television programs are. As a matter of fact how much morbid and violent content is shown daily on the news… that doesn’t make me personally want to go out and shoot people, have a highway chase, or rob gas stations or jewelry stores!

    Simply put in a nut shell - The dude was psychotic and obviously had mental problems, and it's too bad that he took so many innocent lives. I know it’s horrible to say, but IF the guy was contemplating suicide from the get go over his girl friend -- why couldn't he just do himself in and spare the lives and heart break of the victims and their families and friends? Yes, this was a rhetorical question.

    RP

    ReplyDelete
  6. I bet this doesn't get 24-7 coverage or a late night candle light vigil either.

    More than 150 dead in Iraq blasts


    At least 157 people have been killed in a string of attacks in Iraq's capital, Baghdad, security officials say.

    In the deadliest incident, some 115 people were killed in a car bombing in a food market in Sadriya district.

    An attack on a police checkpoint in Sadr City and several other explosions left at least another 42 people dead.

    The attacks came as Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki said Iraqi forces would assume control of the country's security by the end of the year.



    More violence brought to you by the incompetence of Bushco and their PNAC neo-con clown posse......

    ReplyDelete
  7. Another good one, Lydia. Bush's illegal use of signing statements is one of the impeachment charges that need to be leveled against him.

    RP, the only station on which I saw suggestions that he was a terrorist was Faux Noise. While I'm not ready to render an opinion regarding his motives, the things I've seen in his writing (the objection to moral decay and references to Christianity) this nut case may come to us from the religious right.

    ReplyDelete
  8. RP, the only station on which I saw suggestions that he was a terrorist was Faux Noise. While I'm not ready to render an opinion regarding his motives, the things I've seen in his writing (the objection to moral decay and references to Christianity) this nut case may come to us from the religious right.

    I'm inclined to agree. This one seems to have been a hardcore Jesusistani who decided to take it upon himself to punish the sinners.

    If the wingnuts want to find someone to blame for this kind of a mindset, they won't have to look very hard. Not that they will look, of course.

    ReplyDelete
  9. clif said...
    I bet this doesn't get 24-7 coverage or a late night candle light vigil either.


    You know it Clif.

    However there is signs of hope on the horizon. I turned on the news today and lo and behold someone actually took the time to mention that half of New Jersey is underwater, displacing hundreds of thousands of people, and even a brief mention of the two Maryland Minors BURIED ALIVE in Hagerstown.

    Of course this lasted about 90 seconds, and then of course it was back to what size shoe the killer wore.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Of course now today it appears some schools in Maryland are being locked down due to some shooting threat or something.

    Imagine that.

    :|

    After 3 days of 24x7 coverage of the last killer, I am sure some other nut is watching and saying, "hey, I'd like some coverage too".

    If there is a copycat killing in the next week or two, then then CNN\MSNBC and FOX will all share responsibility for the blood that is spilt.

    ReplyDelete
  11. 157 people dead in Iraq in one day.

    Never mind the 50 or 60 who lost their lives yesterday.

    Never mind the Attorney General of the United States testifies before congress tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
  12. As for Lydia's article, I am torn on the gun ownership thing.

    I understand what Lydia is saying, and part of me agrees with it.

    I also worry about the concept of disarming the population. It puts the police and government in a supreme position.

    The Constitution says the Right to Bear Arms shall NOT BE INFRINGED, so I am torn on this one.

    ReplyDelete
  13. But I think it deserves more discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Greetings,

    Lydia, I think your taser idea is an excellent one. I think if more people would come up with and promote alternatives to handguns we could start making a dent in the number of them available.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Hi Lydia and Guys!

    Great article here and on my blog this morning! ;)

    Lydia, I added your photo and website to your story. I think we should do that with each of your articles. :)

    ReplyDelete
  16. I WORFEUS said...

    But I think it deserves more discussion.
    --------

    Worf:

    Yes, definitely!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Carl said...

    Tax bullets...$15,000 per ought to do the trick.
    ------------

    Carl:

    Are you a comedian?

    LOLMAO

    ReplyDelete
  18. I WORFEUS said...

    157 people dead in Iraq in one day.
    --------------

    Worf:

    Everyday is a tragedy in Iraq! We need to bring our troops home!!

    ReplyDelete
  19. TomCat said...

    Another good one, Lydia. Bush's illegal use of signing statements is one of the impeachment charges that need to be leveled against him.
    ---------

    Tomcat:

    Yes and he should be Impeached!

    ReplyDelete
  20. clif said...

    I bet this doesn't get 24-7 coverage or a late night candle light vigil either.
    -------------

    Clif:

    Sad but true Clif!

    ReplyDelete
  21. Jolly Roger said...

    There wouldn't be enough rabbit left behind from such weaponry to eat.
    ------------

    Jolly Roger:

    Don't come to my house..I have bunnies all over my back yard and I love 'em! ;)

    ReplyDelete
  22. Thanks Suzie!

    Thanks TomCat!

    We are having an incredible and controversial guest on our radio show this week: Mike Weinstein of the Air Force Academy, who wrote "With God on Our Side: One Man's War Against an Evangelical Coup in America's Military."

    This is a riveting and chilling book; I can't put it down.

    I believe fundamentalism is actually the "antichrist."

    ReplyDelete
  23. SuzieQ,

    That was Chris Rock's idea, so, um, yea! I'm a well-hung black comedian! :-)

    Tasers...Lydia, it would be hard to bring down a deer with a taser. Of course, you'd have the advantage of alreay partially cooking the venison in situ, sort of like microwaving it in the field while you dress it...

    ReplyDelete
  24. Suzie-Q said...
    Don't come to my house..I have bunnies all over my back yard and I love 'em! ;)


    Now, how many ways to Sunday can I make this a perverted joke?

    ReplyDelete
  25. I WORFEUS said...
    I also worry about the concept of disarming the population. It puts the police and government in a supreme position.


    They already are, iWorf.

    The Second Amendment, as an anti-government measure, made sense when everyone had access to the same weapons.

    Think about it: if Bush is willing to send missiles and smart bombs and A1A tanks into Iraq to kill off a people who had nothing to do with any terror attacks on us, what would stop him from sending those same weapons in to quell an "uprising" in the ghettos of, say, Boston, or LA?

    And what's the best weapon you'd ever be able to buy, legally?

    And you want to tell me that any militia would stand a chance?

    That's the lunacy of the right wing gun-f*ckers right there in a nutshell.

    "Out of my cold dead hands" is precisely what the government prays you want...

    ReplyDelete
  26. Nothing wrong with owning a gun for hunting purposes, as well as defending yourself and family.

    ReplyDelete
  27. You're welcome Lydia and I don't know why I didn't think of it sooner! I used the photo that you are using on your blog, is that ok?

    ;)

    ReplyDelete
  28. Carl said...

    Suzie-Q said...
    Don't come to my house..I have bunnies all over my back yard and I love 'em! ;)

    Now, how many ways to Sunday can I make this a perverted joke?
    --------------

    Carl:

    Don't go there....

    LOLMAO

    ReplyDelete
  29. Carl said...

    SuzieQ,

    That was Chris Rock's idea, so, um, yea! I'm a well-hung black comedian! :-)
    ------------------

    Carl:

    Uh-huh! You talk naughty!

    LOL

    ReplyDelete
  30. james said...
    Nothing wrong with owning a gun for hunting purposes, as well as defending yourself and family.


    True, but how do we make sure thats the only people who have one?

    ReplyDelete
  31. I'm really torn on this issue.


    It is one of those sitution that requires serious discussion and reasoning.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Not knee jerk reactions to an mass shooting.

    ReplyDelete
  33. One things for sure.

    There are a lot of right wing pundits out there, like Michelle Malkin, who are calling the VICTIMS cowards.

    Cowards for not rushing this guy.

    Now while I admit, we'd all like to know how one single guy shoots 32 people, (imagine the marksmanship, even at close range, that must have required) without himself being rushed or overpowered, mostly so we can prepare ourselves for such an event with alternative solutions to the course these people took.

    But to imply they were cowards? Wimps? Because they didn't overpower this guy?

    Thats disgusting.

    ReplyDelete
  34. WORFEUS said...
    As for Lydia's article, I am torn on the gun ownership thing.

    I understand what Lydia is saying, and part of me agrees with it.

    I also worry about the concept of disarming the population. It puts the police and government in a supreme position.

    The Constitution says the Right to Bear Arms shall NOT BE INFRINGED, so I am torn on this one."


    I meant to respond to this earlier but Worf essentially said EXACTLY what I would have said.

    I understand what Lydia is saying and part of me agrees as well.........I dont have a problem with TRYING to prevent some of the loons from getting a gun, I dont think safety courses or psychological tests would be a bad thing particularly for those who wish to carry their guns......BUT

    I DO NOT think we should infringe upon law abiding citizens rights to have guns particularly in their homes to protect themselves and their families.

    Maybe stricter penalties for negligent parents who allow children to get ahold of their guns would help as would psychological tests before someone is allowed to purchase a gun.............I agree that if EVERYONE had a gun the world would be MUCh more dangerous rather than safer since there would be many more shootings for roadrage and petty arguments.

    But having said that law abiding citizend have every right to have a gun in their home to protect their family, criminals will always have guns weather they are outlawed or not and taking guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens will not only make the police and government supreme but will do the same to criminals who will obtain their guns through illegal means and will have little to fear when invading ones home.

    I think the People who designed the Constitution were far wiserr than most people the freedoms they sought to protect were timeless, we may need a few tweaks or minor chages here or there to close up loopoles or adapt to the times But the Bill of Rights will NEVER be outdated..........or Quaint as an idiot about to be impeached or resign once said.

    ReplyDelete
  35. It's disgusting alright, I mean what would anyone do in a situation like that.
    Those people had to be scared out of their minds.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I WORFEUS said...
    james said...
    Nothing wrong with owning a gun for hunting purposes, as well as defending yourself and family.


    True, but how do we make sure thats the only people who have one?"


    You cant criminals will ALWAYS have guns......you just need to take mesasures to TRY and prevent criminals and the psychologically unbalanced from being able to obtain them legally!

    ReplyDelete
  37. And Carl, just because people are outgunned doesnt mean its better to be absolutely defenseless.

    Governments will usually always have civillians outgunned, The British redcoats had our Founding Fathers outgunned, The Iraqi's are outgunned against us, the Afghans were outgunned against the Soviets............that doesnt mean they cant put up a resistance......and from the previous examples a quite effective one at that.

    I agree with some of what Lydia says...........But i DONT think taking guns away from law abiding citizens is the answer or a good idea.

    ReplyDelete
  38. james said...
    It's disgusting alright, I mean what would anyone do in a situation like that.
    Those people had to be scared out of their minds.


    You know it.

    John Derbyshire had the nerve to compare this to Flight 93, where the passengers rushed the terrorists in the cockpit.

    Well the two terrorists were armed with box cutters, not two 9mm semi-automatics.

    ReplyDelete
  39. That is a disgustin, ignorant thing to say..........what I cant understand is how these REich Wing idiots always PRETEND to be so brave but when its their turn to step up they run away like little girls and brove to be the biggest most gutless cowards of all.

    What probably happened is everyone panicked and dropped to the ground, if they would have rushed him many would have survived but in situations like this it takes one couragous clear thinking person to instill courage in the others.........panic and fear are probably the most powerful of emotions and I dont think we can fault the victims for their reaction although it clearly was not the best way they could have handled it.

    ReplyDelete
  40. I don't think it would hurt to have public service messages (freaky as they will be, and I'll probably complain about them) showing the general population just how to rush a single armed gunman who is clearly intending to kill people. That would be good.

    Might not do any good but it would at least make the killers think before trying it if they thought they might be rushed by a the crowd. God knows it works on airplanes now. So I am all for educating the public and preparing them for such events.

    After all, if that had been a room full of unarmed Marines I can assure you there would be 2 or 3 dead tops, not 32.

    But to insinuate that the victims were cowardly or acted poorly is insane, and is cowardly in and of itself. We were not there. We don't know what happened or didn't happen, and most of us have never faced that kind of situation.

    You never know what you're going to do in a sitution for sure, until you're in it.

    These were young people, who thought they were in a safe environment, and they did what they could.

    The only bad guy here is the killer(s).

    And whoever was behind them.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Whats disgusting is calling the victims cowards or trying to make it APPEAR this was Islamic terrorism for political gain.

    If by chance it really was islamic terrorism how would the idiot trolls who keep attributing no terrorist acts in our country to GWB and his destruction of the Constitution and our freedoms reconcile that..........would they say that Bush and his policies are a failure now.

    But let me just make my position clear, terrorism is random acts that can not be stopped by a single person or policies, while we can make our country safer a random act by a crazed individual can NEVER be stopped and to attribute no terrorist acts to GWB is ridicculous, particularly when you look at the horrific act of a few days ago and consider how hard this would be to stop from occuring again.

    ReplyDelete
  42. If you want to see some of this right wing slandering, start with this Time Magazine article.

    SLANDERING THE VICTIMS

    ReplyDelete
  43. Well maybe in some instances that might work worf, but this guy didnt care if he lived or died so I dont know if it would have made much of a differnce if he thought people might get a hold of him and disarm him.

    ReplyDelete
  44. The Oklahoma City bombing was a terrorist attack on April 19, 1995. The attack claimed 168 lives and left over 800 injured. Until September 11, 2001, it was the deadliest act of terrorism within U.S. borders.[1]

    Within days after the bombing, Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols were arrested for their role in the bombing.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Mike said...
    Well maybe in some instances that might work worf, but this guy didnt care if he lived or died so I dont know if it would have made much of a differnce if he thought people might get a hold of him and disarm him


    I am talking about would be copycats.

    As for who this guy was and his motives, I am not sure we can even speculate at this point. When I look at his picture I see someone who looks like they were military trained. And his marksmenship was incredible to say the least. I'm sure our police and military men would be hardpressed to kill so efficiently armed with only two small sidearms.

    But maybe he was just a good shot.

    I don't know.

    All I know is that there is a lot to this story I don't know. I am not sure I ever will either.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Why is it all the "PRETEND" tough guys are a bunch of gutless pussies that have never even been in a gradeschool fistfight no less a war or gunfight...........it boggles the mind if Malkin is so brave how come her skinny ass isnt over in Iraq supporting the war she verbally cheerleads?

    ReplyDelete
  47. I know the news media needs to stop reporting every little detail and focusing on this 24x7 or we will have copycats popping up all over the place.

    ReplyDelete
  48. That is a little hard to believe he killed THAT many with only a 9MM and a 22...........but i'm assuming they just dropped to the ground in a ball and he picked them off like sitting ducks.

    ReplyDelete
  49. WORFEUS said...
    I know the news media needs to stop reporting every little detail and focusing on this 24x7 or we will have copycats popping up all over the place.

    1:51 PM"

    Agreed, it sickens me, I dont want to hear anymore about this.......I wont be watching the news for quite a while........not that i really watch it much anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Mike said...
    That is a little hard to believe he killed THAT many with only a 9MM and a 22...........but i'm assuming they just dropped to the ground in a ball and he picked them off like sitting ducks.


    I think you're right Mike, I think thats probably what happened. After all thats what we tell people to do. Get down and lie low and cover up. People standing usually get shot so thats what we tell people.

    Thats why I was saying it might be good to have some training or instruction, at least to people in offices and schools, to help them overpower a lone armed gunman.

    We keep telling them to do what they say, but that was based on 20, 30 years ago, when the country was still populated by human beings.

    Now we have a new breed, a new crop, who we apparently have failed in someway, as they are completely without honor, decency or reason.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Mike said...
    And Carl, just because people are outgunned doesnt mean its better to be absolutely defenseless.

    Governments will usually always have civillians outgunned, The British redcoats had our Founding Fathers outgunned, The Iraqi's are outgunned against us, the Afghans were outgunned against the Soviets


    Whoa, Mike, the Afghanis were NOT outgunned! The CIA gave them the weapons to beat back the Soviets. Those same weapons are being used against us.

    And yes, the Iraqis are outgunned, but not by as much as you might think.

    I'd even argue the Americans, with 100,000 troops in a country the size of California and a population four times its size, are outgunned.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Mike said...
    Why is it all the "PRETEND" tough guys are a bunch of gutless pussies that have never even been in a gradeschool fistfight no less a war or gunfight


    Are you talking about Derbyshire or the trolls like Widdle Twucker, Texasshole, GooGoo and Freedom Fawn?

    by the way, there's a college kid who wrote a blog in support of Derbyshire's insanity. We're trying to get him drafted for Iraq.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Suzie-Q said...
    Carl:

    Uh-huh! You talk naughty!


    How long you been hanging out on this blog that you only just came to that conclusion????

    ReplyDelete
  54. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  55. worfeus a few observations,

    These for the most part were college age young people who probably had never faced anything like this,

    One very notable exception was the Israeli Professor who had survived the holocaust, only to die holding the door shut so the students he taught could escape. The passengers on flight 93 were older more mature and some even probably had served in the military so had some training.

    In a second room two men did hold a table in front of a door even while the gunman was shooting into the room, to save themselves and classmates.

    That is of course not to mention the RA in the first shooting incident who rushed to the aid of a dorm resident and paid with his life for it.

    There were quite a few heroes that day, but since they didn't pull an "arnold" movie stupid stunt, idiots will screech about it.

    They are such hypocrites, sense they are noticeably absent from Iraq which almost everyone of them to a T support.

    The reichwing noise machine needs to STFU on this one.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Another one bites the dust;

    Roll Call: FBI raids Rep. Doolittle's (R-CA) home in Northern Va. More soon.

    Backstory on the Doolittle investigation here.

    Sounds like former staffer Kevin Ring may have sold Doolittle down the river.

    Update: More here.

    -- Josh Marshall

    Another corrupt gutless re-pubie chicken hawk goes down for criminal corruption while in office from the Abramoff investigation....could happen to a more deserving a$$hole.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Clif, all good points, and in addition, who amongst them wanted to be the first to die?

    When United 93 was hijacked, and the passengers learned what else had been happening, they all knew already they were dead unless they did something. All of them. No one was getting out alive.

    But these kids probably figured, "If I can get my ass out of the line of fire, I can save myself."

    But nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnno, those candyass right wing Nazis demand totalitarian behavior from anyone while they sit on their fat asses behind their keyboards and whiiiiiine about liberals and Iraq....

    ReplyDelete
  58. Doolittle...pretty appropriate name...

    ReplyDelete
  59. Hmmm...looks like Conservatives might have gotten Don Imus fired, but for other reasons....

    "According to european reports of the events surrounding don imus that have gripped the united states this past week, it was during an interview with another american media personality, tim russert, who is the host of a television programme frequently used by us war leaders, wherein while decrying the state of care being given to american war wounded stated, "so those bastards want to keep these boys [in reference to us soldiers] secret? let's see how they like it if i start talking about their [in reference to us war leaders] secrets, starting with 9/11." "

    Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...so Imus was about to start broadcasting the truth about 9/11, and the next thing you know, there's an "uproar" about his program....

    ReplyDelete
  60. FBI RAIDS DOOLITTLE'S HOME

    By Paul Kiel -

    Breaking, from Roll Call:

    The FBI has raided the Northern Virginia home of Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.), according to Congressional sources. No details are publicly available yet about the circumstances of the raid, but Doolittle and his wife, Julie, have been under federal investigation for their ties to the scandal surrounding imprisoned former lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

    More soon, I'm sure.

    Update: Remember that a former key aide to Doolittle, Kevin Ring, who'd worked with Abramoff, resigned suddenly from his job late last week. As I wrote before, that's a clear sign that Ring may be preparing to plead guilty and implicate Doolittle.

    Update: According to The Hill, the FBI searched the home last Friday -- the same day that Ring resigned.

    **********************************

    Funny the FBI raids a sitting congressman's home LAST Friday, but not a peep out of the corporate owned MSM, especially Fox Lies noise machine, who is supposedly against government corruption......

    ReplyDelete
  61. Carl, that passage you quoted originated from Pravda. Great source checking.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Tiny the Liar... a re-pubie congressman gets RAIDED by the FBI and a re-pubie senator is being investigated by the Senate Ethics committee, ... looks like your criminal corruption party of pedophile protection is still bearing bad fruit son.

    Like you do here widdle lying sack of sh*t who welshes on his word

    ReplyDelete
  63. Tall Texan said...
    Carl, that passage you quoted originated from Pravda. Great source checking.


    Says the asshole who constantly posts his brownshirted heroes, Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh...

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    At least Pravda makes a fair game of it, TinyDick!

    ReplyDelete
  64. Clif,

    Ignore the widdle baby, and he'll go away...or start stalking you!

    Oh wait. He did that already, didn't he?

    Yer a serial thug, aintcha, Texasshole?

    ReplyDelete
  65. clif said...
    Funny the FBI raids a sitting congressman's home LAST Friday, but not a peep out of the corporate owned MSM, especially Fox Lies noise machine, who is supposedly against government corruption......


    Where's the outrage from the right wing goosesteppers, like they had over Imus' outting of the 9/11 truth!? It took them almost a week to publish this story! Where's the outrage????

    ReplyDelete
  66. Tiny the Liar is too gutless to do anything but make hollow threats from his keyboard.

    ReplyDelete
  67. clif said...
    Tiny the Liar is too gutless to do anything but make hollow threats from his keyboard.


    And beat his widdle pink dowwy...

    ReplyDelete
  68. tiny the liar does love hanging with the pink pajama circle jerk romper room crowd of gutless chicken hawks.....

    ReplyDelete
  69. Hey, clif, who do you think is leaving the flaps of his Doctor Dentons down for the other boys to play with?

    ReplyDelete
  70. all of them......

    ReplyDelete
  71. A real circle jerk, huh?

    ReplyDelete
  72. Hey, Clif...did you ever have to fire your weapon in anger when you served?

    ReplyDelete
  73. Suzie-Q said...
    Carl:

    Uh-huh! You talk naughty!

    How long you been hanging out on this blog that you only just came to that conclusion????
    ---------------
    Carl:

    Long enough to know that you're a bad boy!

    LOL

    ReplyDelete
  74. Iraq opinion gulf leaving GOP in peril

    Poll shows independents coming down on Democrats' side

    The polarization between Democrats, Republicans and independents on both politics and policy cannot be overstated. The war in Iraq is perhaps the most vivid and important example of the stark differences in opinions based on party affiliation.

    There is a chasm the size of the Grand Canyon between Republicans and Democrats on the Iraq war. More ominous for the GOP is that independents are coming down on the anti-war side, if slightly less vociferously than Democrats.

    This portends potential peril for Republicans in 2008.

    (snip)

    Notwithstanding what they personally believe, it's hard for lawmakers and presidential candidates to defy their bases. But pending some resolution or fundamental change in the fortunes of this war, the attitudes of independent voters may well come to haunt GOP candidates in the general election.

    As with impeachment in 1998, Republicans are listening to their base, but independents are feeling very different, potentially setting the stage for another bad election for the GOP.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Suzie-Q said...
    How long you been hanging out on this blog that you only just came to that conclusion????
    ---------------
    Carl:

    Long enough to know that you're a bad boy!


    I'm not a bad boy.

    I'm just not spanked enough...

    ReplyDelete
  76. Clif said...

    Funny the FBI raids a sitting congressman's home LAST Friday, but not a peep out of the corporate owned MSM, especially Fox Lies noise machine, who is supposedly against government corruption......
    ----------------

    Clif:

    Yeah, that should have been news last Friday when it happened! Hmmm..

    ReplyDelete
  77. I'm not a bad boy.

    I'm just not spanked enough...
    ------------

    Lydia:

    Carl wants a spanking!

    ROFLMAO

    ReplyDelete
  78. clif said...
    As with impeachment in 1998, Republicans are listening to their base, but independents are feeling very different, potentially setting the stage for another bad election for the GOP.


    Ironically, Karl Rove may end up being the greatest Democratic operative ever! A permanent Democratic majority. A permanent Democratic government.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Suzie-Q said...
    I'm not a bad boy.

    I'm just not spanked enough...
    ------------

    Lydia:

    Carl wants a spanking!


    I never said that. I said I should be spanked more often...

    ReplyDelete
  80. I never said that. I said I should be spanked more often...
    -----------

    Carl:

    Uh-huh...try to deny it now!

    Should be= wants

    LOLMAO

    ReplyDelete
  81. Suzie-Q said...
    I never said that. I said I should be spanked more often...
    -----------

    Carl:

    Uh-huh...try to deny it now!

    Should be= wants


    I was just offering an objective assessment of my bad boy tendencies... ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  82. Carl. I do not go there for obvious reasons if you think about it.

    Best to say I did what I had to at the time, and try not to think about it much.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Understood, Clif. And thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  84. I also didn't want to let this story go by the wayside:

    "DENVER, April 13 — Lawyers for two men charged with illegally ejecting two people from a speech by President Bush in 2005 are arguing that the president’s staff can lawfully remove anyone who expresses points of view different from his.

    Alex Young and Leslie Weise said they were ejected because of an antiwar bumper sticker.
    Lawyers for the two, Michael Casper and Jay Klinkerman, said the men were working as organizers for a public presidential forum on Social Security at the Wings Over the Rockies Air and Space Museum in Denver on March 21, 2005, when they were involved in ejecting two audience members, Alex Young and Leslie Weise.

    Mr. Young and Ms. Weise filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court here, saying they were ejected shortly after they had arrived in a car that had an antiwar bumper sticker, although they had done nothing disruptive. The suit charged Mr. Casper and Mr. Klinkerman with violating Mr. Young’s and Ms. Weise’s First Amendment right to free speech."

    BIG SHMILE, Right Wing Trolls! Big SHMILE!

    ReplyDelete
  85. Gee...the last couple of nights, the White Ringers were out here in force, and being really nasty to the people posting here.

    Now....not so much. What's different? Could it be they realize they'd be called on their shit and hard?

    ;-)

    BIG SHMILE, boys! BIG SHMILE!

    ReplyDelete
  86. Lawyers for two men charged with illegally ejecting two people from a speech by President Bush in 2005 are arguing that the president’s staff can lawfully remove anyone who expresses points of view different from his.

    In other words the president of the United states can censor the people he supposedly works for?

    Typical reichwingnut hypocrisy in action here folks,

    Move along nothing to see here just more reichwing hypocrisy in action, nothing special...........

    ReplyDelete
  87. Clif,

    That's precisely right.

    The bigger point is Bush is a coward and so are those who support this jackass.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Clif said...

    Move along nothing to see here just more reichwing hypocrisy in action, nothing special...........
    --------------

    Clif:

    You got that right!

    ReplyDelete
  89. Carl said...

    The bigger point is Bush is a coward and so are those who support this jackass.
    ----------

    Carl:

    Chickenhawks are birds of a feather...

    ReplyDelete
  90. Jolly Roger:

    Don't come to my house..I have bunnies all over my back yard and I love 'em! ;)


    I've reformed..... sort of. With all the crap that's in factory-farmed foods these days, I do consider taking up the gun again from time to time.

    A well-prepared bunny is an exceptional culinary experience. Don't knock it 'till you try it :)

    ReplyDelete
  91. Jolly roger;
    Carl will bite his lip over this one,

    A well-prepared bunny is an exceptional culinary experience. Don't knock it 'till you try it :)

    ReplyDelete
  92. Hey, Clif...did you ever have to fire your weapon in anger when you served?

    May I answer this?

    I never did personally, but one can say that I was in the neighborhood of a few "incidents." The mid-80s were an interesting time to serve. Someday maybe someone will write a book about them.

    ReplyDelete
  93. The Idiot in Chief and all his Brownshirts cant handle any dissent thats why they handpick all their audiences so its all blindly loyal goosesteppers.

    Bush is an imbecile that who cant handle any questions but praise and softballs he despises any free speech except what he desires to hear....His ego is so swollen and pumped up that he deems himself some kind of emperor of god and he tolerates no opposing viewpoints or opinions because his lies and dishonest talking points cant hold up in the light of truth and honest discussion, hence his use of censorship to silence the opposition and create the appearance of phony support!

    ReplyDelete
  94. Mike this is in line with your previous posts on the subject;


    THE DOW IS CRASHING


    A Story in Pictures

    by Mike Maloney

    especially this graph and this graph and they underlying explainations of them.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Wow Clif, thats an EXCELLENT article..........that is right on point with and perfectly echoes what I have said in here from day one.

    I have posted that the Dow would have to be at 14,000 just to break even using the BS bogus government stats and according to my calculastions and articles I have read about 17,500 using real inflation stats.

    Idiots like Rusty and TT should read this so they have a clue.

    ReplyDelete
  96. We've been warnming for years that the dollar has to collapse. There simply isn't any good reason for it to be worth the paper it's printed on.

    Our latest look at this covers the growing tendency of the world's markets to "short" the dollar.

    $200.00 per barrel oil is not far off into the future. I wonder what the Chimpletons will say then?

    ReplyDelete
  97. Mike even if they read it, the kool-aid swilling fooles would deny it even as their stock portfolio fails to keep pace with the price of food energy and other REAL day to day costs.

    They will think that the Zimbabwe stock market is the model;

    Zimbabwe: Best Performing Stock Market in 2007

    CNBC and other stock market tabloids are notorious for making simplistic linkages between the stock market and gross domestic product (GDP). They tell us that any event that stimulates GDP growth inevitably drives stock prices up, and any event that hurts GDP growth pushes stocks down.

    Since the largest share of GDP is consumption, consumer demand becomes the all-important figure driving growth. When the consumer gets too excited, the Fed must step in to cool them down with interest-rate hikes. When the consumer isn't spending, Fed interest-rate cuts stimulate demand.

    The tragedy currently occurring in Zimbabwe completely contradicts this sort of logic. Zimbabwe is in the middle of an economic disintegration, with GDP declining for the seventh consecutive year, half what it was in 2000. Ever since President Mugabe's disastrous land-reform campaign (an entire article in itself), the country's farming, tourism, and gold sectors have collapsed. Unemployment is said to be near 80%.

    Yet something odd is happening.

    The Zimbabwe Stock Exchange (the ZSE) is the best performing stock exchange in the world, the key Zimbabwe Industrials Index up some 595% since the beginning of the year and 12,000% over twelve months. This jump in share prices is far in excess of increases in consumer prices. While the country is crumbling, the Zimbabwean share speculator is keeping up much better than the typical Zimbabwean on the street.


    Graph

    In fact crusty the clown is probably breaking his piggy bank to put all his "little Lincolns" in that stock market right now.

    ReplyDelete
  98. You guys are a wealth of information! Thanks for all the info and links! :)

    ReplyDelete
  99. Jolly Roger said...

    $200.00 per barrel oil is not far off into the future. I wonder what the Chimpletons will say then?
    -----------

    Jolly Roger:

    Yikes!! $200/per barrel is gonna hurt this country more than ever!

    ReplyDelete
  100. Jolly Roger try reading The Oil Drum it's a daily blog of insiders who accept the limits of oil and what that will mean when production can no longer keep up with demand and some cuts will have to be put in place,

    there is another term for this;

    Peak Oil

    since the underlying basis of value for the dollar world wide was the fact it was the bench mark currency which oil was sold by, and backed by both the US government and Saudi production capabilities, it was solid for a long time, however now with debts which will take decades to pay off, collapsing industrial capabilities over extended military fiascoes and absolutely no willingness on the administrations part to really solve any of these probelms the world has decided the dollar is not worth the paper it is printed on.

    The only draw back is so many dollars are held by so many countries they can't cut and run from the dollar yet, they would lose far too much value far too quickly, so they keep working around the edges to limit what damage they take hoping the house if cards survives the hurricane of the sub prime melt down, and fearing what the real damage the global realisation the oil is running out in the not to distant future, will do to both the dollar and rest of the worlds economy.

    MSNBC and FOX both have stories which says 2018

    what they are referencing is this (warning large PDF file)

    which I have down loaded and am reading.

    ReplyDelete
  101. It will destroy this country SQ, but thats probably Bush;s plan to seize ultimate power and destroy the middle class.

    These Neo Con fools are goosestepping jackbooted throwbacks but the plan is the right from the pages of Hitler and co!

    ReplyDelete
  102. Clif,

    I think the dollar dump will start the day we hit Iran, and I think China will do it. The Chinese have already started diversifying themselves currency-wise, and they have been hyper-aggressive in their pursuit of new trade agreements. Plus, they are now our biggest competitor for the scarce oil resources. Dumping dollars would leave them in a much better position as buyers after they suffer some relatively short term pain.

    ReplyDelete
  103. The Chinese hold over a trillion dollars in reserve, and they can't dump too fast other wise the dollar would collapse and their US trade wealth creation system would grind to a halt, they also still can't feed their 1.4 billion people, and if Oil gets more expensive and harder to secure(the Saudis are not supplying all the oil they are asked for) then their "growth" will suffer, st this point the Chinese do not have the military assets to counter a US blockade of oil from the middle east to china which would collapse their economy rather quickly. (and Wal Mart also)

    the deals they have with Africa are not on line yet so the Chinese still want a couple of years of reasonable stability, they really don't care who supplies the oil as long as it keeps getting supplied, remember their attempt to purchase Unical? They just want guaranteed supplies not politics.

    That said, Bush is sort of in a box about attacking Iran especially with the deteriorating situation in Iraq, now they are cross training Air Force personnel to do convoy duty for the army which is drawing down personnel assets they would need for a scaled up air campaign against Iran.

    The Chinese understand the problem that declining oil supplied from the OPEC countries will cause, especially since the OECD states ability to produce oil is in decline, and nothing to make up all the short falls has been discovered and developed.

    ReplyDelete
  104. The Dollar has declined almost everyday for the last week ot two, right now we are VERY close to the 136.6 high for the Euro I say we could hit 150 in the next year if things play out right.

    I think Bernanke will be forced to throw the stock market under the bus and raise rates to defebd the dollar..........because the phony tough talking inflation hawk BS is no longer working no one with a brain is buying that crap.

    Your right a war with Iran could accelerate the dollar decline but I think China wants more time to diversify out of the dollar and with m3 no longer being reported the Fed can just print money and finance their own debt and it will be a while before this becomes apparent.

    All the players will TRY to keep the sham that is the dollar going for a while longer............how long that is remains to be seen, butregardless attacking Iran is probably the DUMBEST thing the chimp could do ........and believe me he's cornered the market on dumb and has done some pretty dumb things.

    An attack on Iran would make the invasion of Iraq look like a brillancy worthy of Einsten compared in retrospect it is one of the worst blunders that could happen.

    ReplyDelete
  105. The Chinese hold over a trillion dollars in reserve, and they can't dump too fast other wise the dollar would collapse and their US trade wealth creation system would grind to a halt, they also still can't feed their 1.4 billion people, and if Oil gets more expensive and harder to secure(the Saudis are not supplying all the oil they are asked for) then their "growth" will suffer, st this point the Chinese do not have the military assets to counter a US blockade of oil from the middle east to china which would collapse their economy rather quickly.

    Two points. The first one would be that our currency's collapse would leave us unable to blockade the mouth of the Hudson River in a very short amount of time, and the second point would be that the oil-producing world would want to trade with someone that has something tangible to offer the day our currency collapsed. The Chinese could bust us without firing a shot, and I'm pretty sure they know it.

    The USSR still had a mighty military (something we actually do not, as far as ground force projection goes)-but it was the economic collapse that ultimately unraveled them. A big reason for that collapse was the snapping shut of foreign purses.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Anyone watch CNBC tonight they were talking about a guy from the DEPT interior fired from his job by the Bush oil cronnies because he discovered that the oil companies were defrauding the American Tax payers hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue.......they said the Bush Administration instilled the Dept of interior with blindly loyal partisan cronnies loyal to the oil companies rather than the American people.

    apparetly the Bush administration would rather the let the oil companies keep the money than use it to pay down our debt that they have run up, or fund the war, or ease the tax burden on the middle class.

    What did Bush say oh yeah..........money trumps peace.

    ReplyDelete
  107. Mike I think the saudis are damping down the Bush recklessness as far as Iran goes, becasue Iraq is off line they have had to stress their production up which if continued for a long period of time would result in underground damage to the fields and problems with future production, attacking Iran would cause them to drop off line and possibly produce damage to the Saudi infrastructure both from Iranian attacks and the sizable Shiite minority which lives in the area the Saudis get the majority of their production from.

    The Saudis know how much they can produce and how bad their internal situation would get from either a collapse of the oil markets because of the war with Iran and what that would do to the worlds oil supplies and economy and internally to their own society which would become very unstable with all the unemployed youth they have along with the amount of subsidizing they do to keep civil unrest down.

    No right now I don't think the Saudis want another middle east war which could explode the entire region, what they face is more then enough at this time. and they know Bush Cheney are gone in less then 2 years and they will have to deal with the mess they have already created there with out an all out Sunni Shiite war.

    ReplyDelete
  108. The soviet military was much more hollow then you know, the kursk sub was a very real symptom of how bad it was, and the military could do a hell of a lot even with out the monetary assets up front, both with the strategic petroleum reserve and the drastic cuts in other spending to preserve the military needs which the entire world depends on to police the trade routes and oil delivery systems the worlds economy rests on.

    The Chinese can't bust us very fast with out doing severe damage to their own economy because the US east Asian trade would decline quickly which would Collapse the economies of China Japan and south Korea, along with constraining the Indian growth.

    Europe and Brazil can't absorb what would disappear if the US stopped buying from China at this point, and the economic retraction inside their economy at this point would be politically destabilizing to their very shaky societal fight between the new economic types and the rural large poor who resent the moves which are destroying their way of life.

    China has severe internal problems in some areas, and they have problems feeding all it's people, which if they had to endure a recession in their economy at this point could be a tipping point for a full scale rebellion by large parts of their society which either didn't benefit or were forced out of work by the slowdown.

    They can't just dump dollars and ignore the consequences both internal and external at this point. Just as Bush could never attack Korea because of the blowback from China Japan and South Korea who all live around North Korea, it is never as easy or clean as people think, second level repercussions and unintended consequences will always upset the best laid plans and the Chinese of all people with their 3000 year history know this, thus their very conservative moves at this point.

    ReplyDelete
  109. and the Chinese of all people with their 3000 year history know this, thus their very conservative moves at this point.

    A reading of that history would be more supportive of my argument. The Chinese will do what they think is right, whether or not it hurts them. Whether or not they lose. They always have.

    ReplyDelete
  110. clif said...
    Jolly roger;
    Carl will bite his lip over this one,

    A well-prepared bunny is an exceptional culinary experience. Don't knock it 'till you try it :)


    Oddly enough, Clif, for lunch yesterday I had coniglio over tagliatelle di ciocolata with a ragu sauce...

    Business lunch. Youse unnerstand?...but very tasty!

    ReplyDelete
  111. A. Guns save more lives than they take; prevent more injuries than they inflict

    * Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day.1 This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.2
    * Of the 2.5 million times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, the overwhelming majority merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8% of the time, a citizen will kill or wound his/her attacker.3
    * As many as 200,000 women use a gun every year to defend themselves against sexual abuse.4
    * Even anti-gun Clinton researchers concede that guns are used 1.5 million times annually for self-defense. According to the Clinton Justice Department, there are as many as 1.5 million cases of self-defense every year. The National Institute of Justice published this figure in 1997 as part of "Guns in America" -- a study which was authored by noted anti-gun criminologists Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig.5
    * Armed citizens kill more crooks than do the police. Citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as police do every year (1,527 to 606).6 And readers of Newsweek learned that "only 2 percent of civilian shootings involved an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal. The 'error rate' for the police, however, was 11 percent, more than five times as high."7
    * Handguns are the weapon of choice for self-defense. Citizens use handguns to protect themselves over 1.9 million times a year.8 Many of these self-defense handguns could be labeled as "Saturday Night Specials."
    B. Concealed carry laws help reduce crime

    * Nationwide: one-half million self-defense uses. Every year, as many as one-half million citizens defend themselves with a firearm away from home.9
    * Concealed carry laws are dropping crime rates across the country. A comprehensive national study determined in 1996 that violent crime fell after states made it legal to carry concealed firearms. The results of the study showed:
    * States which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%;10 and
    * If those states not having concealed carry laws had adopted such laws in 1992, then approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and over 11,000 robberies would have been avoided yearly.11
    * Vermont: one of the safest five states in the country. In Vermont, citizens can carry a firearm without getting permission... without paying a fee... or without going through any kind of government-imposed waiting period. And yet for ten years in a row, Vermont has remained one of the top-five, safest states in the union -- having three times received the "Safest State Award."12
    * Florida: concealed carry helps slash the murder rates in the state. In the fifteen years following the passage of Florida's concealed carry law in 1987, over 800,000 permits to carry firearms were issued to people in the state.13 FBI reports show that the homicide rate in Florida, which in 1987 was much higher than the national average, fell 52% during that 15-year period -- thus putting the Florida rate below the national average. 14
    * Do firearms carry laws result in chaos? No. Consider the case of Florida. A citizen in the Sunshine State is far more likely to be attacked by an alligator than to be assaulted by a concealed carry holder.
    1. During the first fifteen years that the Florida law was in effect, alligator attacks outpaced the number of crimes committed by carry holders by a 229 to 155 margin.
    2. And even the 155 "crimes" committed by concealed carry permit holders are somewhat misleading as most of these infractions resulted from Floridians who accidentally carried their firearms into restricted areas, such as an airport.15
    C. Criminals avoid armed citizens

    * Kennesaw, GA. In 1982, this suburb of Atlanta passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate subsequently dropped 89% in Kennesaw, compared to the modest 10.4% drop in Georgia as a whole.16
    * Ten years later (1991), the residential burglary rate in Kennesaw was still 72% lower than it had been in 1981, before the law was passed.17
    * Nationwide. Statistical comparisons with other countries show that burglars in the United States are far less apt to enter an occupied home than their foreign counterparts who live in countries where fewer civilians own firearms. Consider the following rates showing how often a homeowner is present when a burglar strikes:
    * Homeowner occupancy rate in the gun control countries of Great Britain, Canada and Netherlands: 45% (average of the three countries); and,
    * Homeowner occupancy rate in the United States: 12.7%.18
    Rapes averted when women carry or use firearms for protection
    * Orlando, FL. In 1966-67, the media highly publicized a safety course which taught Orlando women how to use guns. The result: Orlando's rape rate dropped 88% in 1967, whereas the rape rate remained constant in the rest of Florida and the nation.19
    * Nationwide. In 1979, the Carter Justice Department found that of more than 32,000 attempted rapes, 32% were actually committed. But when a woman was armed with a gun or knife, only 3% of the attempted rapes were actually successful.20
    Justice Department study:
    * 3/5 of felons polled agreed that "a criminal is not going to mess around with a victim he knows is armed with a gun."21
    * 74% of felons polled agreed that "one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot during the crime."22
    * 57% of felons polled agreed that "criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police."23

    http://www.gunowners.org/sk0802.htm

    ReplyDelete
  112. Foreign currency markets are rather...intriguing right now.

    I don't think China will start to pull out of dollar support the moment we invade Iran, but they will cause problems.

    The yuan is too closely tied to the dollar and while Eastern culture does allow for the possibility fo self-sacrifice to make a higher point (especially if it weakens your enemy more), or as Griffith put it, in analyzing Sun Tzu:

    "Sun Tzu's theory of adaptability to existing situations is an important aspect of his thought. Just as water adapts itself to the conformation of the ground, so in war one must be flexible; he must often adapt his tactics to the enemy situation. This is not in any sense a passive concept, for if the enemy is given enough rope he will frequently hang himself. Under certain conditions one yields a city, sacrifices a portion of his force, or gives up ground in order to gain a more valuable objective. Such yielding therefore masks a deeper purpose, and is but another aspect of the intellectual pliancy which distinguishes the expert in war."

    So the decision China would need to make is, would the sacrifice of their economy, now fourth largest in the world, be sufficient to make the American economy crippled past the point of being stronger than China's.

    It almost seems like a no-win situation, until you look at the diplomatic moves China has made in Africa and South America. They're setting up the body blow. The question is, how quickly can they lock this down, and how likely is it to stay locked down?

    This is, I believe, the reason China has run a strategy counter to rationality, which would be to cut ties to the dollar and let the yuan float, or tie it to the euro.

    If America elects another Bill Clinton-like diplomat, then China's gambit will not have paid off and they will suffer some serious economic consequences, mitigated by the ties to the dollar (which is a hedge move that could pay big dividends should we elect another Republican).

    If America elects another Republican, China will be more likely to pull the trigger, for they learned the lesson Americans have not: as Truman said, if you want to live like a Republican, vote Democratic.

    ReplyDelete
  113. Texasshole said...
    some nonsensical bullshit right wing talking points


    Wrong!

    155,000 Americans were killed last year, half by guns.

    That means that 75,000 more Americans would be walking the streets right now if guns were banned.

    Simple, elegant math, to counteract your twisted warped pathetic Nazi nonsense, Texasshole.

    ReplyDelete
  114. A gun is 43 times more likely to kill a relative accidentally than to protect a homeowner.

    Suicides are 200 times more likely in a gun-owning household. That's 32,000 people a year.

    States with lax gun control laws have gun suicide rates twice as high as states with tight gun control laws.

    So Texasshole? Take your gun, polish it up reeeeeeeeeeeeeal shiny, turn it sideways and stick it up your candyass, widdle boy!

    Bangbang, shootshoot, look Mommy! I'm a real Texas cow-*BANG*

    Buhbye, don't let the door hit you on the way out....

    ReplyDelete
  115. Carl the Stalker -- thanks for the faulty advice.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Poor Widdle Cowpoke-r...got his widdle capgun on his widdle holster, and his widdle half-gallon cowpoke-r hat, with the widdle bakery string tie that makes him look like a all gwown up cowboy!

    And he wuns awound, going "bang! bang! bang!" while he skis down the bunny slopes at MOUNNNNNNNNNNNT PILE-O-TURRRRRRRRRDS!!!!!!!!!

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

    And then he goes and criminally stalks people who are clearly better than him, who piss him off by bring right all the time!

    ReplyDelete
  117. Tall Texan said...
    Carl the Stalker -- thanks for the faulty advice.


    Awwwwwwwwwww, I know you are, but what am I?

    ReplyDelete
  118. Carl the Stalker, remember when you asked others to find Ann Coulter's private email address and exhorted others to publish it on the Net?

    YOU are a stalker.

    ReplyDelete
  119. Look! I'm so proud...Texasshole is actually growing a set!

    How much can I piss you off before you go and do something stupid? Again.

    ReplyDelete
  120. Tall Texan said...
    Carl the Stalker, remember when you asked others to find Ann Coulter's private email address and exhorted others to publish it on the Net?


    I'm afraid you'll have to refresh my memory...

    ReplyDelete
  121. Not that it matters. Ann Coulter is a public figure, and like Dick Cheney, has to put up with a certain amount of that kind of nonsense.

    Unlike me, who has taken pains to make his information private, Ann Coulter has invited her interest.

    ReplyDelete
  122. Troll ass kicked?

    Check!

    Wow. And it's only 9:30 in the morning!

    ReplyDelete
  123. Please read the info I added to the blog thread, about gun control.

    If guns are so easy to buy in Virginia, and anyone getting off a boat with a terrorist agenda can buy one, why do we feel safe here?

    ReplyDelete
  124. Tiny the Liar when are you going to admit calling people anti Semites while screeching for every one to Love Israel instead of their fellow persons like christ commanded, you lying sack of sh*t.

    ReplyDelete
  125. iWorf,

    Don't worry...I'm holding the sledge hammer behind my back on the other part of Texasshole's hilarious claim about e-mail addresses... ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  126. Carl, what's the differnece between writing something and just saving it to your hard drive, and writing something and publishing it on a blog for dozens or hundreds to read?

    In the second example, you are putting stuff out there FOR OTHERS TO READ.

    If someone republishes that, how could you cry fowl with a straight face?

    ReplyDelete
  127. Tiny the lying sack of sh*T remember ;

    DO YOU LOVE ISRAEL son?

    ReplyDelete
  128. Lydia Cornell said...
    Please read the info I added to the blog thread, about gun control.

    If guns are so easy to buy in Virginia, and anyone getting off a boat with a terrorist agenda can buy one, why do we feel safe here?


    Thanks, Lydia,

    And the simple fact is, we don't. When the shooting happened, nearly every fascist blog in America had the same two points to make:

    1) We need more guns,

    and 2) This was a terrorist act.

    And don't think Al Qaeda wasn't watching this carefully. How hard would it be for them to stockpile (they probably already are) an arsenal and send suicide shooters into any large gathering place and "legally" murder thousands, if not tens of thousands, of Americans?

    Terrorists (just ask Tex-theStalker-asshole, who abuses the Internet daily for his criminal purposes) will utilize our very freedoms and openess against us.

    ReplyDelete
  129. Imagine this: every kid and teacher in that school has a gun. Someone is out in the hallway is waving a gun around in the air. EVeryone rushes out from classrooms to the hallway, waving their guns. WHO IS THE ORIGINAL GUNMAN? If everyone has a gun, who's the bad guy?

    ReplyDelete
  130. Tall Texan said...
    Carl, what's the differnece between writing something and just saving it to your hard drive, and writing something and publishing it on a blog for dozens or hundreds to read?

    In the second example, you are putting stuff out there FOR OTHERS TO READ.

    If someone republishes that, how could you cry fowl with a straight face?


    Chicken on your mind, coward?

    Go talk to a cyberstalking lawyer, Texasshole. What you are doing is illegal.

    And I will, when the time is right, prove it to you.

    ReplyDelete
  131. Lydia Cornell said...
    If everyone has a gun, who's the bad guy?


    At law, all of them.

    ReplyDelete
  132. Carl the Stalker, if you go to "great pains" to keep your information private, why did you publish your sexual orientation on a publicly accessinble blog?

    ReplyDelete
  133. Remember Today is the day a reichwingnut wack-job gun nut blew up the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City because he hated how the gun laws were being enforced, especially against illegal gun owning pedophiles like David Koresh.

    ReplyDelete
  134. Tiny the Liar, what is

    accessinble

    ReplyDelete
  135. How about a real response, Clif?

    ReplyDelete
  136. Tall Texan said...
    Carl the Stalker, if you go to "great pains" to keep your information private, why did you publish your sexual orientation on a publicly accessinble blog?


    How do you know a) that was me? and b) I was telling the truth, Texasshole?

    You don't. But you are harassing me and stalking me. And that is illegal. I suggest, seriously, you find a lawyer and make sure you know what you're doing is illegal, if you don't want to believe me.

    ReplyDelete
  137. Let's see...Texasshole promised to come to my house and confront me.

    Meaning he believes he knows where I live.

    Meaning he had to look that information up by accessing private records that I have no control over.

    Meaning, he engaged in criminal activity that by his own actions and definition, were intended to intimidate me.

    Lydia, why is this stalker still allowed on this blog?

    ReplyDelete
  138. Clif, is referring to the president as "Gary Bush" a typo? You still haven't told us what a "chemical machine log" book is.

    ReplyDelete
  139. Tall Texan said...
    Clif, is referring to the president as "Gary Bush" a typo? You still haven't told us what a "chemical machine log" book is.


    Awwwwwwwwwwww, poor widdle cowpoke-r....look! He has to be a dick just to get attention!

    ReplyDelete
  140. Having had his ass kicked first thing in the morning, already, he can't refute on facts, so he has to attack syntax, spelling, and punctuation!

    What a pussy. What a little cowpoke-r....

    So who you dating Friday night, Texasshole? Bessie or Flossie?

    ReplyDelete
  141. Carl, I have no idea where you live, nor have I tried to find out. I know you live in the NYC are because you said so right here on this blog. I really don't care because I have no interest in meeting you, contacting, or anything else in that regard.

    ReplyDelete
  142. By the way, Lydia, well-spoken.

    ReplyDelete
  143. Tall Texan said...
    Carl, I have no idea where you live, nor have I tried to find out. I know you live in the NYC are because you said so right here on this blog. I really don't care because I have no interest in meeting you, contacting, or anything else in that regard.


    I cached the comment you deleted, Texasshole. You can't be that stupid!

    ReplyDelete
  144. Come on Tiny the LIAR;

    Admit you called people including ME anti semites when you screeched for every one to LOVE Israel,

    When I told YOU I followed what Christ said and loved people instead of the states on this planet.

    Admit your a lying sack of bullcrap son, and you have repeatedly lied here for the reichwing losers of last fall.

    ReplyDelete
  145. I see the widdle lying fake texan can't refute the truth once again.

    ReplyDelete
  146. clif said...
    Come on Tiny the LIAR;

    Admit you called people including ME anti semites when you screeched for every one to LOVE Israel,

    When I told YOU I followed what Christ said and loved people instead of the states on this planet.

    Admit your a lying sack of bullcrap son, and you have repeatedly lied here for the reichwing losers of last fall.


    Of *course* they lie, Clif...they're REPUBLICANS!

    ReplyDelete
  147. clif said...
    I see the widdle lying fake texan can't refute the truth once again.


    He's busy putting on his widdle suede chaps so he can go to school and imitate Cho Seung-Hui...*bangbang* I hate you! I hate you! *bangbang*

    ReplyDelete
  148. Clif, asking if you love Israel is not the same as making the accusation that someone is anti-Semitic.

    ReplyDelete
  149. Tall Texan said...
    I've just cached that comment, and there is a differnece between the literal words and a reasonable inference of the meaning when taken in their enirety.


    Are you willing to stake your freedom and what passes for your life savings on that, Texasshole?

    Because the courts are going to tell you, it's not intent. It's impact.

    And everyone here had the same reaction I did: you intended to do me harm

    Buhbye, pussy!

    ReplyDelete
  150. Tall Texan said...

    Clif, asking if you love Israel is not the same as making the accusation that someone is anti-Semitic.


    No a$$hole but screeching I was an anti-semite when I refused to answer you STUPID question was LIAR.

    ReplyDelete
  151. Tall Texan said...
    Clif, asking if you love Israel is not the same as making the accusation that someone is anti-Semitic."

    YOU did both on many occasions Troll Tex so stop your lying and spinning and STHU!, and drop the holier than thou attitude TROLL!

    ReplyDelete
  152. Tiny the Liar faux nontexan, want to deny you EVER called me an anti-semite, PROVE you never did son, cause you just admitted asking ME to love a country and NOT people as Christ demanded son.

    ReplyDelete
  153. Tall Texan said...
    Clif, asking if you love Israel is not the same as making the accusation that someone is anti-Semitic.


    So when did you stop beating up Jews, Widdle Cowpoke-r?

    ReplyDelete
  154. So tiny the lying nontexan, do you deny EVER calling any one here an anti-semite?

    ReplyDelete
  155. "clif said...
    So tiny the lying nontexan, do you deny EVER calling any one here an anti-semite?

    7:29 AM"

    No, I just have no recollection of making those statement. I could be wrong.

    It's always a mistake to deny something categorically when the recollection is iffy.

    ReplyDelete
  156. Tall Texan said...
    "clif said...
    So tiny the lying nontexan, do you deny EVER calling any one here an anti-semite?


    No, I just have no recollection of making those statement. I could be wrong.


    See, someone without hate in his heart wouldn't find comfort in that weasel, Texasshole. They would be able to proudly state they never said that.

    You, on the other hand, are a degradation on humanity.

    ReplyDelete
  157. Well son YOU called me one, and since YOU can't recall, just like the lying Attorney General claims now, I'll refresh your memory son,

    NOW about that bet you welshed on son since your memory is SO BAD.

    ReplyDelete
  158. Oh surrrrrrrrrrrrrre, you're all righteous about stuff when it comes to us "libs" but you can't even see the log in your own faux-moral eye.

    ReplyDelete
  159. How about attacking the rest of us as LIARS son about the bet,

    YOU .... welshed on?

    Especially MIKE

    ReplyDelete
  160. A fat, stalking, lying, hypocrite is no way to go thru life, Widdle Cowpoke-r

    ReplyDelete
  161. Clif, Mike, well played refutation of the lying little weasel. My hat's off to you both.

    ReplyDelete
  162. Well Carl, refuting liars is happening all over speedy Gonzo is hating his truth-o-cution he is getting RIGHT NOW in the Senate Judicial Committee Hearings.

    He don't look so happy and Arlen Spector and Patrick Laehy has slapped his smart aleck remarks down quick.

    ReplyDelete
  163. "Truth-o-cution"

    LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  164. If Gonzo's memory is SOOOOoooo....bad,

    How in the HELL is he attorney general, and who dresses him?

    ReplyDelete
  165. Gonzo's testimony mainly consists of I can't remember, I don't recall, I wasn't me unless I was supposed to be in charge.


    He can't remember what he and those who worked directly for him did. well how can he be trusted to do the most important law enforcement job in the country if he can't remember why he does day to day.

    ReplyDelete
  166. clif said...
    Gonzo's testimony mainly consists of I can't remember, I don't recall, I wasn't me unless I was supposed to be in charge.


    Like I just said to Texasshole...."someone without hate in his heart wouldn't find comfort in that weasel, Texasshole. They would be able to proudly state they never said that.

    You, on the other hand, are a degradation on humanity.
    "

    ReplyDelete
  167. Carl and Talll Texan -- what on earth are you two arguing about?

    I googled Carl and can't even find out his last name. Where did you get his address TT?

    TT I noticed you were taunting Carl months ago, and it seemed you two knew each other. Please fill me in on how you know each other.

    No threats please, even cryptic ones, are allowed on this blog.

    Also, I do not like name calling and personal insults coming from ANYONE.

    Let's learn to use our wisdom to find creative ways to speak to each other, higher ways. We have to raise the dialogue.

    ReplyDelete
  168. What Carl posted was not a threat, just a heated observation. But with all the yelling back and forth, I would like to see you two make up.

    Here's an experiment. Put God in the middle and really try to see each other with new eyes. What would love do?

    How can we find compassion for each other in the midst of assigning to each other suspicious motives and agendas?

    Can we find common ground, at least here?

    ReplyDelete
  169. To be of use to this ailing world, full of lost souls who so desperately need love, we have to take the hatred out of our own hearts first.

    That's why the "gate is narrow."

    ReplyDelete
  170. It's really hard to love those who hate you, who persecute you, who wish you harm.

    That's why Christ said "narrow is the way"

    It's not a broad highway, full of war-hungry "haters" who retaliate and fight their enemies, judge their fellow man or cast stones.

    Love is the best disarmament. It disarms fear.

    When you choose not to fight, you disarm your enemy, who then finds nothing left to fight. You diminish his power - which was never real to begin with.

    ReplyDelete
  171. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  172. This is not to say, we shouldn't shine a light on evil and corruption. We should point it out, expose it and rout out the truth -- hold people accountable who are stealing and killing.

    And it's not to say that when we see a crime being committed, whether it be a murder or theft -- we shouldn't do everything humanly possible to prevent loss of life by intervening with force.

    The point is our motives and intentions. If our motives are pure, honest and thoughtful, the actions we take will be right.

    But to seek out vengeance with the "eye-for-an-eye" mentality leads nowhere but to death and destruction.

    The Amish are really true Christians.

    ReplyDelete
  173. Carl, there are tasers that can pierce body armor these days. They do not kill but stun.

    Worf, I like the idea of public service messages and defense training for this kind of thing.

    Teach people to know how to rush a gun-wielding psycho.

    ReplyDelete
  174. TT - Mike? Mike always seems like a truth-teller to me.

    Why would you think Mike is an instigator; he is just passionate about the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  175. Lydia,

    If God were standing between us, I'd still spit in his eye.

    And God would probably nod and say "You go, boyeee!"

    Willful ignorance is no excuse in the 21st Century. There is no compromising with people like him and his "friends", who would stab him in the back the second he showed any "weakness".

    I speak with conservatives all the time, all day long. I count many intelligent and articulate conservatives among my friends.

    Texasshole and the rest of them ought to seriously, and I mean, seriously, consider the consequences of their idiocies.

    ReplyDelete
  176. Lydia,

    Again, I like the taser idea. I also agree with the qualification and certification procedures. The only thing that I do disagree with is the psychological screening. Here is why.
    What agency would do this psychological screening. Does it go to the private sector or do we pile up yet another layer of government bureaucracy? I've first hand knowledge of counseling agencies and a lot of their employees are underquailified, overworked, and underpaid. It wouldn't take long, IMO, to turn into yet another "rubber stamp" process just to clear the paper work.
    Secondly, what if the fellow doing the screening is a Christian Fundie who decides that an atheist shouldn't be allowed to own a firearm or vice versa. In other words, who watches the watchmen?
    Finally, if you want to psychologically screen potential gun owners then how about drivers? How about occupational licenses that involve potentially dangerous tools such as a carpenter. Where does the line get drawn?
    Anyway, I raise these questions because the VT shootings have shown there is a problem but there is no single answer. AFAIC, this will a variety of approaches.

    ReplyDelete
  177. Frank, you made me think. I guess you're right about that part, but at least we should make sure people don't have a history of killing small animals, stalking, vengeful rage/abuse or severe alcohol and crystal meth addictions.

    I'm sorry, but putting a gun in an unbalanced person's hands -- that can kill many people, is simply stupid.

    Maybe gun shop owners will be more careful or start their own "conscience- union."

    I know people that act completely different when they're drunk and would even pick up a gun at times, but only when they're "out of their mind."

    Basically we all need to take better care of each other. We also need to take care of the mentally ill, rather than leave them on the streets.

    ReplyDelete
  178. Lydia,

    The owner of the Roanoke Shop, where Cho bought his two guns, was on the Today Show yesterday.

    I do believe he finally saw the light about the error of his ways.

    A month too late, naturally.

    ReplyDelete
  179. Suzie Q I agree. he should be impeached. Lydia, I look forward to your show this week. Whether or not Fundamentalism is the Antichrist could open an unsolvable debate, but I will certainly agree that, as practiced, it is certainly anti-Christian.

    ReplyDelete
  180. Lydia said I'm sorry, but putting a gun in an unbalanced person's hands -- that can kill many people, is simply stupid.

    I agree. Then how can we justify keeping an army, navy, marine corps, national guard, and reserves in an unbalanced person's hands?

    ReplyDelete
  181. OOPS - forgot to include a coast guard.

    ReplyDelete
  182. Merchant marine, too, TC

    ReplyDelete
  183. Carl and Lydia

    I really don't blame the gun dealer at all. He's not psychic. He doesn't read minds. If you are looking for where the system broke down you may want to start with the two co-eds who Didn't file stalking charges against Cho. That alone would have put up a red flag and disqualified him from owning a gun at least here in Florida.
    Cho was also voluntarily committed which does not dis-qualify him because those records are sealed. As a Vietnam Vet who has worked in a VA counseling center the client confidentiality policy is extremely strict as well it should be.
    When the guy from Roanoke Firearms got back the report from the Virgina State Police there were no Red Flags. He made a good faith sale. As I said before, he's not psychic.
    Even if Cho had had enough Red Flags to stage his own May Day Parade, he would've just gone on down the road and bought the guns from an unlicensed dealer by simply going to gun shows, flea markets, or even reading the local want ads. No questions asked and no background check required.
    THIS HAS GOT TO STOP!!!
    This is the big leak that sabotages any real effort at background checks and drives a lot of legitimate firearms dealers up a wall.
    I believe in the Second Amendment but as a former soldier and the son of a distinguished police officer that entails an enormous responsibility.

    ReplyDelete
  184. Hi Lydia and Guys!

    Wow! You guys have been busy! LOL I need to read to get caught up but first I gotta grab some lunch.. ;)

    And, no I don't eat bunnies!

    LOL

    ReplyDelete
  185. I think its good to discuss this, but blaming the gun dealer is a joke.

    The gun dealer complied with the law.

    If you want to blame someone blame lawmakers for making laws that don't do what you want them to do.

    But blaming the gun dealer is ridiculous. He may be scum, he may not be, but either way, he was complying with the law I am sure.

    Gun dealers should look for red flags obviously, but this guy probably didn't raise anyway. He was an asian college student.

    Most of us until Monday would not have thought of an asian college student as a dangerous person.

    ReplyDelete
  186. We can't be reactionary in our response to this with regards to the Constitution.

    Don't you see that being reactionary to tragedy is what got us into trouble with our civil liberties and the wiretapping scandal in the first place?

    Knee jerk reactions to tragic events are merely decisions made in haste under duress and usually do more harm than good.

    ReplyDelete
  187. I think Hollywood is as much to blame as anyone for the violence in our society.

    For a wealthy industrialized nation, we have probably the highest crime rate in the world.

    Why?

    We fill our childrens minds with a neverending stream of all manner of bloody violence paraded before their little eyes in living color.

    Doesn't anyone notice that as movies become more and more grisly and violent, that crimes likewise become more grisly and violent?

    Didn't anyone notice that shortly after the movie HEAT came out, where an epic gun battle in the streets of LA take place with heavily armed bankrobbers and outgunned law enforcement, that soon after the same thing took place in LA, video taped live on television?

    We keep parading a non stop every increasing diet of murder, rape and blood in front of the population in livid gory realistic detail, and we ain't seen nothing yet.

    ReplyDelete
  188. George Bush opened the door for violence in this country, buy showing us that violence was a first choice, even when diplomatic and alternative methods abound.

    He set the precedent for our society, to believe that offense is a good thing. Violence breeds violence, both within, and without.

    ReplyDelete
  189. I WORFEUS said...
    I think Hollywood is as much to blame as anyone for the violence in our society.

    For a wealthy industrialized nation, we have probably the highest crime rate in the world.




    I agree, I've been saying that for years.

    It's not just movies, it's also TV shows, such as the Soprano's
    NYPD Blue and so on.

    Hollywood is the force behind the tragedies that go on in the world

    ReplyDelete
  190. I WORFEUS said...

    He set the precedent for our society, to believe that offense is a good thing. Violence breeds violence, both within, and without.
    --------------
    Hi Worf! ;)

    Yes, he did set it and now the hate and violence is stronger than ever!

    ReplyDelete
  191. Best question of the day, courtesy Cookie Jill at Skippy:

    "how can a mentally ill person
    walk into a store and buy semi-automatic guns with no questions, background check or wait period but an average "joe on the street" can't walk into a drug store and get a couple of drugs to ease post nasal drip without having to show proof of i.d. and getting their name, address and phone number put on a national medication database to make sure that they don't buy more within a certain time period.

    something is really freakin' wrong with our society."

    ReplyDelete
  192. Frank,

    No one is accusing the gun dealer of lax judgement. My comment pertained to his suddenly seeing a larger picture, that no matter how closely you follow the law in something like this, you can still be part of an huge tragedy.

    That may scare him out of selling another gun, and of course, your points are all valid.

    We may not judge him. He, on the other hand, may be judging himself.

    ReplyDelete
  193. Hollywood is at it's happiest when these events happen, soon there will be a movie or TV movie to watch, glorifying every violent scene.

    Call it "Virginia Tech Massacre"

    ReplyDelete
  194. Hi Naughty Carl! ;)

    Yes, that is an excellent point made and there is definitely wrong with our system!

    But, look who is in charge of this country and that explains it!

    ReplyDelete
  195. iWorf,

    I don't know that you can place all the blame on Hollywood.

    Grisly crimes happened long before television and long before films

    Romans nailed living people to crosses. Babies were staked out for vultures (something I expect will happen in this country once Roe v Wade gets overturned).

    And I suspect part of what you're talking about is the improved coverage of the community with the advent of film and particularly TV. Crimes that never made it to public knowledge are splashed across our screens nightly.

    Yes. Hollywood has gotten more graphic. Yes. Eric and Dylan deliberatly imitated Doom when they shot up Columbine. So there is something to be said for your point.

    But then again, if they had played Doom and couldn't get semi-automatic weapons? We don't have Columbine. So there's something wrong with that part of society as well.

    Too, there's something wrong with a society where mental health is a concern only in the breach: we ask kids to provide a doctor's note before they are admitted to college. Maybe they ought to provide a psychologist's note, as well.

    We minimize, even belittle, the emotional health of someone. That's wrong, too.

    THere are so many levels that this tragedy exposes in the underbelly of American society that we can't even begin to comprehend how many weaknesses there really are.

    ReplyDelete
  196. Suzie-Q said...
    Hi Naughty Carl! ;)


    Morning, Spanky!

    ReplyDelete
  197. Bottom line, iWorf, people are people, and people do ugly things. There are 6 billion of us. Let's say 1 billion Muslims, 2 billion Buddhists and Hindus, a billion Christians...and two billion others.

    It's clear religion ain't helping any to change our basic humanity, or better, inhumanity.

    ReplyDelete
  198. Carl said...
    We minimize, even belittle, the emotional health of someone. That's wrong, too.

    THere are so many levels that this tragedy exposes in the underbelly of American society that we can't even begin to comprehend how many weaknesses there really are.
    ----------------
    Naughty Carl:

    Yes, if the Virginia Tech gunman would have gotten the mental health care that he needed, perhaps this tragedy wouldn't have happened.

    And, that brings to question, if he was determined to have mental issues, wasn't he under mental health care?

    Apparently, he was taking prescribed medications. So, my point is, perhaps people taking drugs for depression and other mental disorders, need closer monitoring/observation by their health care provider.

    *Luv, Spanky*

    LOLMAO

    ReplyDelete